Bush caves on warrantless wiretaps, hands program off to FISA court
posted at 8:01 pm on January 17, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
We’re late posting about this and I know some of you must be ready to burst from frustrated ventage about how Bush doesn’t take terrorism seriously, we’re not fighting the enemy with all the tools at our disposal, etc etc. Go on. Let it out.
FindLaw has a photocopy of Gonzales’s letter to Leahy. The operative words are “speed and agility.” I’ve seen at least one lefty today scoff at his assertion that they’ve been considering this move since spring 2005, which is a good six months before the New York Times exposed the program. It’s not that unlikely: the Times first learned about it before the 2004 election and discussed it with people in the administration at the time. Gonzales and the White House counsel might have reasoned that the paper could go public with it at any time and it would behoove them to have some sort of proof onhand that they were considering bringing the program under the jurisdiction of FISA in case public reaction was overly negative.
Why, though, if they were considering such a move would they have defended their anti-FISA position so aggressively? Answer: why not? The left’s casus belli against Bush is that he’s tried to expand executive power on multiple fronts (interrogations, military tribunals), not just wiretapping. To concede on one could have weakened the others. Think Progress made that connection at the time of the Hamdan decision, in fact, arguing that the Supreme Court’s narrow reading of the 9/11 war resolution not only rendered the military tribunals unconstitutional but undermined the chief source of legal authority for the wiretapping program.
But why cave now? Granted, the program was ruled unconstitutional by a federal district judge in August, but in an opinion the general crappiness of which was widely remarked upon at the time. Why not press the issue if you’re Bush and take your chances with the Supremes? If they upheld the program it would fall to Congress to override it legislatively, and how would they manage that knowing that they’d need 67 votes to beat Bush’s veto? These are people who can’t muster the balls to do better than a symbolic nonbinding resolution on matters where 65% of the country is behind them.
Well, except for Hillary. But then, we always knew she had balls.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Ignacio Ramos and Jose Campean deserve a post.
Theworldisnotenough on January 17, 2007 at 8:02 PM
Makes no sense.
Perhaps a Rovian Jedi Mind Trick?
Kini on January 17, 2007 at 8:07 PM
I really, REALLY hope there’s some classified info out there I don’t need to know that answers this.
It’s possible….
Ringmaster on January 17, 2007 at 8:12 PM
I tell ya..between Bush and the RINO”s i’m not sure if many will vote for GOP for decades….GERRRRRRRRRRRRR!!
davy on January 17, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Strangely, I’m not outraged. From what I gathered later in the story, they can still do the wiretapping. Alas, I’m not an attorney, so I’ll defer to the legal minds.
JammieWearingFool on January 17, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Of course, there’s other big news tonight.
JammieWearingFool on January 17, 2007 at 8:16 PM
I heard something in passing on the radio about this a while ago; Thought I misheard, or at least I hoped I did.
Alas.
And after many disappointments, I’ve long given up on hoping for things like this being ’strategery’.
LegendHasIt on January 17, 2007 at 8:18 PM
The only logical answer is they got what they needed to make it work through the FISA route. They wouldn’t have given in if they hadn’t.
I suspect they’d been trying to get the FISA court to come on board with an agile program - prior to all the fruhaha - that would meet the country’s needs anyway and this just forced the court to get off its collective ass and do its job.
Dwilkers on January 17, 2007 at 8:29 PM
The dems won in November so we can expect a lot of this. The “nice” GOP will let them do what they want and the White House will go along. At some point civility goes out the window and principle returns to the table. But at what point? After an episode of 24 really happens? Too late then my amigos……
ritethinker on January 17, 2007 at 8:31 PM
Roll over, play dead.
Good puppy! Yes you are!
SouthernGent on January 17, 2007 at 8:36 PM
If you like Dennis Miller like I do, turn to Fox News. He’ll be on O’rielly in a few minuets
R D on January 17, 2007 at 8:38 PM
He is doing real old style dances????
:-) ;-)
LegendHasIt on January 17, 2007 at 8:42 PM
I think Bush got a judge to sign off on the whole thing. Nothing to be outraged about if you read the info coming out.
24 hour rule before going into the usual histrionics, based on the first trickles of info.
Stormy70 on January 17, 2007 at 8:47 PM
Doesn’t matter now. The media and the leftists totally blew the effective angle of the international wiretaps. You know… the secret part. The evil-doers not knowing we were listening. The terrorists are using webcams with cuecards now. They get the advantage of positive id as well.
Griz on January 17, 2007 at 8:47 PM
What it means is that they are not picking up any more useful information. So why not throw the other side a bone.
right2bright on January 17, 2007 at 8:53 PM
Rush made a good point earlier today, by taking this off the table, it is one less piece of ammo for the Dems, and the focus would stay on Iraq…….. unless we get hit again and someone askes the question, “Why didn’t you try to stop this?”
As far as Iraq goes…………Mz. Clinton:
Can you please explain to us all the exit strategy and cutting off of funds that Iran has for Iraq?
(crickets chirping)
Mz. Clinton?
PinkyBigglesworth on January 17, 2007 at 8:58 PM
George McClellan Bush does it again. Are there no men in Washington?
Valiant on January 17, 2007 at 8:58 PM
Hooray for civil liberties!
JaHerer22 on January 17, 2007 at 9:45 PM
….for those savages overseas that want to destroy the U.S.
TugboatPhil on January 17, 2007 at 9:52 PM
I have always seen this as a non issue in that it was always likely that the Courts (including Fisa) wouold rule the wiretaps legal.
I am more concerned about them challenging or caving in on military tribunals.
William Amos on January 17, 2007 at 10:00 PM
Tell me.. which one did you lose? How exactly did it effect you directly?
Mazztek on January 17, 2007 at 11:33 PM
“Hooray for civil liberties!”
No doubt traitors like JaHerer22 are doing a happy dance. After all, they just castrated an important secret national defense activity in return for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, as no “civil liberty” infringments were involved in the program.
So, dance, traitor, dance.
And when they strike us again, no doubt you’ll do another little happy dance. We know your ilk.
georgej on January 17, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Maybe 24 is a show with a preview of things to come.
Kini on January 17, 2007 at 11:42 PM
Cops who cover up a shooting deserve nothing but jail. I hope they drop the soap.
Soothsayer on January 17, 2007 at 11:57 PM
George Bush, feckless moron that he is, IS A RINO! Wake up and smell the sh*t that he keeps dumping in your face, why dontcha?
Soothsayer on January 18, 2007 at 12:00 AM
Ya’ll should go read AJ Strata for his take. Basically he says Bush has gotten blanket approval from the courts, and this is not how it is being represented in the media.
The media should never be trusted to get it right the first time. Take their first draft of a story with a grain of salt.
Stormy70 on January 18, 2007 at 12:06 AM
JaHerer doesn’t know the answer to your question - just knows that it was bad, really bad.
Rick on January 18, 2007 at 12:52 AM
A judge can’t just sign off on the whole thing. They have to approve individual warrants. Read more. “Blanket warrants” like the one you describe were one of the main reasons that the fathers of this country fought the British.
We’ll see. There may be more to this… far be it from the administration to tell the truth about anything with regard to terrorism or civil liberties.
georgej, you sound like “Stan” from this season of 24.
Mark Jaquith on January 18, 2007 at 4:11 AM
Mark Jaquith writes: “georgej, you sound like “Stan” from this season of 24.”
Does the truth hurt, fella?
georgej on January 18, 2007 at 5:19 AM
Still awaiting the answer to the question……….
“Hey, Mz. Clinton, since you are recently back from Iraq what is the exit strategy of Iran for Iraq?”
I knew I couldn’t sleep for a reason.
I think I just created the Conservative talking point for the ‘08 elections…….
PinkyBigglesworth on January 18, 2007 at 5:44 AM
Once again, SINO (SoothsayerInNameOnly), I have to ask you not to call our President a “moron” because it makes you sound like one yourself, which I know you are.
President Bush is no “RINO;” hee may not be “conservative” enough for you, but he’s done more than enough Conservative things as President for me and I hardly regard it as “sh*t.”
No civil liberties were abridged by the NSA wiretapping and further, I don’t think this recent decision to have this review by the relevant court will take the “teeth” out of the program to catch terrorists either.
Jen the Neocon on January 18, 2007 at 8:16 AM
The godfather of the neocons, Irving Kristol, is a self-described Trotskyist. Read excerpts from his Memoirs of a Trotskyist.
The problem we conservatives have with neocons is the same we have with liberal Democrats. They believe liberalism will work if the right people are in charge. Statist liberalism fails every time it is tried. Conservatives do not want to see the United States smoldering on this ash heap of history.
Bush is a moron because he was conned into pursuing liberal policies under the neocon banner. He failed because liberalism never works. He draped the Medal of Freedom around Kristol’s neck in 2003. Can you neocon RINOs understand why Bush’s policies force bile into our mouths?
Valiant on January 18, 2007 at 8:40 AM
I am not sure to what ‘enough Conservative things” you are referring. Especially in the past 2 years.
My opinion is Bush is a RINO and is rolling over to all the liberal to moderate thinkers. My backing of him has stopped this past fall as he stopped being the leader of this country. He is indecisive as compared to 6 years ago. His failure to act on immigration is unforgivable.
Wade on January 18, 2007 at 9:52 AM
Hooray I can call OBL now.
VikingGoneWild on January 18, 2007 at 11:17 AM
If I remember correctly, this all started more than a decade ago when the Clintons had sooo much to hide, so many skeletons in the closet (some human) and the end of REAL intelligence, as we used to know it, was upon us.
The Clitons should be held responsible for future missed intel ( and past intel- 9/11 as well).
Attacks on American soil since 1995, from not being able to listen to terrorists, should be on them.
.
All to cover up whitewater, rapes and dead people.
Nothin’ serious, for a Cliton.
shooter on January 18, 2007 at 4:46 PM
Perhaps you’re not familiar with the show. “Stan” is the “I’m just trying to protect my family [by harassing Muslims]” guy. Full of testosterone (or as he likely calls it, masculine patriotism). No respect for America, or what it stands for, just looking for a chance to turn his fear into aggression. He breaks into a Muslim’s house and is killed in lawful self-defense.
You remind me of him because you think that in order to save America from the oh-so-menacing threat of terrorism we need to destroy everything America stands for. You mock as traitors people who cheer for the Constitution and the upholding of individual freedom. You assume that anyone who wants to defend these things must do so because they are interested in making it easier for terrorists to throw sand in the country’s face. You love America more than freedom, and so you have bestowed upon yourself Absolute Moral Authority on matters relating to patriotism. Oh, and also because you’re a jerk.
Mark Jaquith on January 18, 2007 at 5:43 PM